Friday, September 30, 2005

Grand Jury Indicts Two N.Y. Mosque Leaders: terrorism indictments with ties to Jaish-e-Mohammed

Grand Jury Indicts Two N.Y. Mosque Leaders

Federal Grand Jury Charges Two N.Y. Mosque Leaders With Conspiring to Support Terrorists

By RIK STEVENS Associated Press Writer

The Associated PressThe Associated Press

ALBANY, N.Y. Sep 29, 2005 — A federal grand jury has issued new indictments against two mosque leaders in upstate New York who are charged with conspiring to support terrorists, prosecutors said Thursday.

Yassin Aref and Mohammed Hossain were charged last year with supporting terrorists in a money laundering scheme. The new indictments include more specific allegations that the pair attempted to provide support to Jaish-e-Mohammed, an Islamic extremist group based in Pakistan that is on the State Department's list of terrorist organizations.

Aref, 35, is the imam of the Masjid As-Salam mosque in Albany. Hossain, 50, is a founder of the mosque. Both men have been free on $250,000 bond since shortly after their arrest in August 2004.

U.S. Attorney Glenn Suddaby did not immediately return a call seeking an explanation of the new charges Thursday evening.

The initial 19-count indictment accused them of working with an FBI informant who posed as a part-time arms dealer and proposed that Hossain hold money from the sale of a shoulder-fired missile that would be used to kill a Pakistani diplomat in New York City. The superceding indictment adds 11 counts against Aref and eight against Hossain.

Aref was charged with making false statements to immigration officials and the FBI when he denied being a member of the Islamic Movement in Kurdistan, an organization alleged to be an armed movement seeking an Islamic government in Iraq. He also denied knowing Mullah Krekar, believed to be the founder of Ansar-al-Islam, a radical Islamic fundamentalist group.

Aref, who allegedly witnessed the financial transactions and wrote receipts, has said he knew nothing about any missile. An FBI photo shows the informant holding a missile launcher while Hossain watched. Hossain said later he did not think the launcher was real.

If convicted on all counts, Aref faces up to 470 years in prison and Hossain up to 450 years, Suddaby said in a statement. Both men also could face millions in fines.

Aref's attorney, Terence Kindlon, said Thursday that he had not read the indictment and did not know why it was issued. "There are really no new facts here," Kindlon said. "It's based on the same old facts."

Hossain's lawyer did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

The defendants were scheduled to appear in court Friday.


Wednesday, September 28, 2005

Growth Competitiveness Index 2005: India 50, Pakistan 83

Full report here.

PTCL sale in trouble?

Investors paying price for uncertainty: Takeover of PTCL
By Dilawar Hussain

KARACHI, Sept 27: No news is not always good news. The government, the Pakistan Telecommunication Company Limited (PTCL) and most objectionably the Privatization Commission (PC) is maintaining a deafening silence on what is preventing the highest bidder — Dubai-based Etisalat (Emirates Telecommunication Company) from taking over the PTCL.

Etisalat had deposited earnest money amounting to $40 million with the SBP a short while after the bidding held on June 18 this year. But the buyer is still to pay the 90 per cent balance from $2.59 billion (Rs155.158 billion) that it had offered for 26 per cent shares with management rights in the company. At the time most people thought Etisalat’s bid of Rs117.01 per share to be surprisingly high. Runner-up China Mobile had sought to acquire the Pakistan telecom at only Rs63.48 per share. That was the moment of great satisfaction for the government and the PC. Now, as the date of takeover and more importantly the pay up of balance 90 per cent of the bid money continues to shift from August 18 to 24 to Sept 8 to 16 to 18 and now Sept 30, all that jubilation seems to be drowning in a glass full of gloom.

To the surprise of everyone, at the meeting of the Cabinet Committee on Privatization ((CCoP) on Monday with the prime minister in the chair, the progress on PTCL sell-off did not even get a mention. Minister for Privatization and Investment Dr Abdul Hafiz Shaikh, who had earlier promised to talk to the press about several issues including PTCL, supposedly took the flight from the back door just as soon as the meeting was over. Did the PM himself restrain the minister from keeping up his promise? And the question is why?

Ask a PTCL official about the telecom’s handing over/taking over and he would respond that it was none of their business, but that of the PC. At the Commission’s office in Islamabad, the federal minister and the secretary have conveniently made themselves unavailable to the media. Why is everyone avoiding a discussion about the PTCL privatization, as a plague? Why mus’nt the public know of where the transaction stands? What are those “problems in the finalization of post-bidding details” that should not be brought to the citizens’ knowledge? Quite clearly the more delay that is being made in making facts public, the more the transparency of the transaction is coming under a cloud.

Knowledgeable sources say three days after the bidding, Etisalat had raised several issues. Those included deferred payment structure; ability to pledge the acquired shares; right to increase shareholding via a ‘call option’ for additional ‘A’ class shares; allowing dual listing of PTCL shares in UAE; management agreement; exemption from withholding tax; waiver of duties & taxes; custom duty waiver and ability to transfer acquired shares.

The press has been able to dig out only slight information about some of the matter. But most experts wondered why at all the sale of PTCL was brought under the hammer if all issues under the Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) and Shareholding Agreement (SHA) had not first been amicably settled.

The government and the PC may be unaware, but the investors are paying the price of uncertainty. PTCL released the company’s financial results for the year ended June 30, 2005 at the stock exchanges on Tuesday. The price of telecom stock plunged by Rs2.05 to close at Rs64. The reason being that the results and payout were lower than the lowest of analysts’ expectations. Most analysts were expecting the company to post earning per share (eps of Rs5.75-5.90); the actual turned out to be only Rs5.22. But the most heart breaking news was that the PTCL Board completely omitted a dividend, whereas investors were looking at a final payout between Rs3.50 to Rs5.50 per share.

The meeting of the board to approve the accounts was scheduled to begin at 9:30 in the morning but the announcement of financial figures was received not until 8 minutes before the close of trading session. But some punters took that also as a blessing in disguise, for investors who were given to faint, did not miss much of the day’s trading at the bourse!

LATimes/Max Boot: The U.S. must put pressure on abetting nations such as Pakistan and Syria.

Cracking down on terror's cronies

The U.S. must put pressure on abetting nations such as Pakistan and Syria.

Max Boot

September 28, 2005

ONE OF THE KEYS to defeating any guerrilla movement is to cut off its outside support. That is what the United States managed to accomplish in the Philippines from 1899 to 1902 but spectacularly failed to do in South Vietnam, where communist fighters benefited right up until the end from the Ho Chi Minh Trail leading to havens in North Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.

Today, even as the U.S. is making considerable progress in Iraq and Afghanistan, we are failing to isolate the battlefield. The extremists attacking U.S. forces and our allies continue to receive sanctuary and support from neighboring states, notably Pakistan and Syria. It is, of course, difficult to close any border, but we could do more by going to the source of the trouble.

Terrorist attacks in Afghanistan have reached a four-year high. Roadside bombings are becoming more common and more sophisticated. Insurgents are utilizing "shaped" explosives capable of destroying armored vehicles and setting them off with high-tech remote-control devices, and they are taking a growing toll. Already, 82 U.S. service members have died there this year — a 58% increase over last year.

The effectiveness of the Taliban is limited because they are so unpopular, as seen in their failure to disrupt parliamentary voting on Sept. 18. That they are nevertheless able to continue their offensive is due in large measure to their ability to train, supply and recruit in Pakistan.

President Pervez Musharraf brags of one crackdown after another against the Islamists, yet somehow they continue operating with near impunity. Clearly, the Pakistani dictator is turning a blind eye to their activities, while some of his military and intelligence officials are suspected of actually aiding the Taliban. This from a man who receives $700 million a year in U.S. aid.

The Bush administration needs to lean on Musharraf to do more — not only in fighting Islamist extremists but also in bringing back democracy — by cutting his allowance, if necessary. That it isn't pushing harder is perhaps understandable because of the widespread fear that toppling Musharraf would result in a more anti-American regime.

Less explicable is our failure to apply greater pressure on Syria, whose regime is already as anti-American as it gets and which continues to act as a conduit for terrorists infiltrating Iraq.

Foreign jihadis may be only a small part of the overall Iraqi insurgency, but they are its most vicious element — the monsters who drive cars filled with explosives into crowds of Shiites. As President Bush said on Sept. 13, "These people are coming from Syria into Iraq and killing a lot of innocent people." The president added that "the Syrian leader must understand we take his lack of action seriously."

Bashar Assad understands nothing of the sort. After all, he has been hearing similar warnings for more than two years. Way back on July 21, 2003, Bush said that "this behavior is completely unacceptable, and states that support terror will be held accountable."

How has Syria been held accountable? Has Damascus been bombed? Have U.S. and Iraqi troops crossed the border to destroy terrorist safe houses? The only repercussions so far have been U.S. economic sanctions that are toothless because there is almost no trade between Syria and the U.S. in the first place. The European Union, ever helpful, has actually been moving to expand economic links with Syria by granting it "associate" membership.

Perhaps the administration hopes that the United Nations will take care of Syria for it. A U.N.-appointed detective has been doggedly investigating the murder of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, and all trails lead to Damascus. Four senior Lebanese security officials with close ties to Syria have been jailed, and more suspects may be fingered.

But, although the backlash over Hariri's assassination forced Syrian troops out of Lebanon, it is doubtful that it will force Assad out of Syria. If we want to stop Assad's "unacceptable" behavior, we'll have to do it ourselves.

That does not mean a full-scale invasion, because U.S. troops are already stretched too thin. But bombing strikes, commando raids and increased support for anti-Assad dissidents may help to concentrate the mind of the world's sole surviving Baathist strongman.

Either Bush needs to order some of those steps, or he and his aides need to stop threatening Assad in public. They are turning Teddy Roosevelt's dictum on its head and thereby undermining American credibility by speaking loudly and not wielding a big stick.


MAX BOOT is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

Tuesday, September 27, 2005

Shireen Mazari's heartburn on the India-US so-operation - part 3

India locks into US agenda

Shireen M Mazari

The intimacy of the Indo-US strategic partnership was shown up most clearly at the IAEA, with India casting a vote in favour of the EU 3-sponsored and US-backed resolution on Iran. This resolution effectively opens the way for taking the Iranian case to the UN Security Council. Interestingly, till this vote, India had been in the forefront of decrying US attempts to take the Iranian nuclear case to the Security Council --and there is in existence a formal nuclear cooperation agreement between India and Iran also. But US legislators had made it clear that the principle of "either you are with us or against us" still held and India should fall in line behind the US on the Iran nuclear issue if it wanted to see its own nuclear deal with the US go through Congress. So, undoubtedly, in its national interest, India did a complete somersault at the IAEA. A much less powerful Pakistan managed to hold its ground and abstained, but then we do not have anything as lucrative as the Indo-US nuclear and defence agreements at stake!

Whatever the compulsions now on India, clearly it is going to be difficult for India to go through with the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline project. The US has already made its opposition to this known to both Pakistan and India. However, again, for Pakistan there is little to be gained by going along with the US on this issue. For India, the case is entirely different since it is now the strategic partner of the US in this region and will therefore be implementing the US strategic agenda -- which one assumes is in sync with the new Indian global ambitions. For those who still hope India will adopt its own strategic policies and not go along with the US agendas in this region, the IAEA vote should set them straight about Indian intent. What Pakistan must do is to ensure that if India backs out of the pipeline project, it is not able to find a face saving escape route, especially in terms of the security pretext. As for Pakistan, we have too much to lose not only economically, but also strategically if we do not go along with this project.

Meanwhile, the Indo-US strategic relationship continues to be operationalised at the military level. The latest reflection of this is the joint naval exercises that commenced on Sunday, 25 September in the Northern Arabian Sea. Termed the Malabar-05 exercise, this is the biggest nine-day long joint naval exercise between the two strategic partners. Apart from aircraft carriers and Early Warning aircraft the exercise will include submarines also. According to Rear Admiral DK Joshi, the Assistant Chief of the Indian Naval Staff, the exercise will involve simulated air strikes, air defence and other tactical operations. The idea is to focus on counter-terrorism operations as well as "anti-sea piracy and to streamline interoperability."

While the US military holds joint exercises with many of its allies, the nature of the exercises and the terrain where they take place is significant in the case of India. After all, these naval exercises send a message to the countries along the Gulf and Indian Ocean signalling Indian interests that now seem to be reaching out into the Indian Ocean from the Red Sea to the Malacca Straits. And there is already an Indo-US agreement for the joint patrolling of this area, which controls the energy flows to South and East Asia. Iran needs to take note of this because it signals a new Indian approach to Iran - as a US military partner. For Pakistan also, there is a veiled threat in this and if one links this up with the Indian covert actions coming across from its consulates in Jalalabad and Kandahar in Afghanistan as well as from Zahidan in Iran, one can understand a little better the problems relating to Balochistan and especially Gwadar -- notwithstanding the local politico-economic factors that provide fertile opportunities in the first place.

Equally important is the fact that India is also a partner of the US in the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). This is one of the many "coalitions of the willing" whereby the US and its allies have anointed to themselves the right to contravene the Law of the Sea and halt ships on the high seas on the merest hint of suspicion that they may be carrying some components of WMD or other threatening cargo. They have also given themselves a similar right for international airspace. Now we all know what destruction a mere hint of suspicion can result in -- as happened in Iraq where a whole country has been destroyed merely on the wrong assumptions, some would say whims, of the Bush Administration.

Nor is it just Indo-US naval exercises that have a special strategic significance. There have been Indo-US military exercises in Occupied Kashmir also which certainly confronts Pakistan with a threat multiplier and obviously China was also being sent a strong message. So Indo-US exercises go beyond the traditional exercises that the US holds with countries like Pakistan --- where the intent normally is to see the preparedness of the latter in certain threat situations as well as to ascertain the war doctrines.

Coming in the wake of the IAEA's Iran resolution, the Malabar-05 exercises have an added symbolic importance for Iran and Pakistan -- as well as China. The message emanating from India is clear: That it will go along with US strategic goals in this region, be it targeting the Iranian nuclear programme or containing China. For Pakistan, the US has made it clear that the Indo-US military and nuclear alliance is at a different strategic level from the tactical cooperation with Pakistan on the counter-terrorism war.

Equally important, we need to factor in this strategic partnership when examining the Indian demand for access to the land route into Afghanistan and beyond. It is not merely an economic issue anymore but a politico-military one in terms of giving India and the US military space -- both overt and covert in that region through our land route. What will be the long terms costs for us in what could become an encirclement of Pakistan by India on the Western and Eastern borders as well as in the Arabian Sea? How will we reconcile our military cooperation with the US in the face of the ongoing strategic military relationship between the US and India? Will what we share militarily with the US, be shared by the US with India -- either deliberately or inadvertently? And how will our national interest in evolving a long-term understanding with our critical neighbour Iran be compromised by the Indo-US partnership and our relationship with the US?

At the very least, our strategic milieu has become more complex and our threat calculations have to factor in the long-term implications of the Indo-US defence and nuclear agreements and their strategic partnership. The US may have de-hyphenated its India relationship from its relationship with Pakistan, but for Pakistan this has only aggravated the impact of the US-India cooperation in terms of security parameters. Now we cannot de-hyphenate our relationship with the US from our relationship with India.

The writer is Director General of the

Institute of Strategic Studies, Islamabad

Email:smnews80@hotmail.com

Saturday, September 24, 2005

Jihad in Kashmir is terrorism, says Sardar Qayyum

Jihad in Kashmir is terrorism, says Sardar Qayyum

NEW DELHI: Sardar Abdul Qayyum Khan, the former prime minister of Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK), on Saturday said that jihad in Kashmir was terrorism and that the mujahideen were saboteurs of peace in the region.

“There is no jihad in Kashmir. The terrorists are being employed by those with vested interests. Jihad is waged to protect the destitute and downtrodden, not to kill women and children,” Sardar Qayyum said during a reception hosted by the Kashmiri community, according to a UNI news report.

The former AJK prime minister said that militants were maligning Islam in the name of jihad. “The ongoing peace process between Pakistan and India could be derailed if these militants acquire weapons of mass destruction,” he said. sana

Friday, September 23, 2005

New York Times: Pakistan pushing terrorists into Afghanistan

September 23, 2005
The Danger Next Door

Washington

THE Sept. 18 elections for Parliament and provincial councils were an important step in Afghanistan's march toward democracy. But now that progress is threatened by an increasingly violent insurgency that uses Pakistan as a staging area for attacks. Unless the United States and Pakistan take steps to eliminate this sanctuary, the security situation in Afghanistan will continue to deteriorate and undermine the country's fragile democracy.

This year has been the most violent in Afghanistan since the United States helped overthrow the Taliban government in 2001. The number of Americans killed so far in 2005 (74) is a 570 percent increase from 2001 and a 50 percent increase from 2004. In addition, the number of insurgent attacks against Afghan civilians has steadily increased each year since 2001.

Unlike the violence in Iraq, the fighting in Afghanistan is not the result of a local population deeply hostile to American forces. A 2004 opinion poll by the Asia Foundation showed that 65 percent of Afghans had a favorable view of the United States government, and 67 percent had a favorable view of the American military - findings supported by my own observations and data from trips to the region during the last three years.

Nor is the fighting in Afghanistan the result of a failing American political and military strategy. American conventional and Special Forces have conducted effective strike operations and civic action programs that have undermined Taliban, Qaeda and Hezb-i-Islami insurgents and their local support network in Afghanistan.

Instead, a complex support network in Pakistan is the key to the Afghan insurgency's survival. Taliban insurgents in southern Afghanistan get supplies and help in Pakistani provinces like North-West Frontier and Baluchistan. Numerous captured Taliban prisoners have said they received training in Pakistani areas like the Mansehra district. Even more troubling, evidence suggests that Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence directorate has helped Taliban insurgents.

How can the insurgent sanctuary in Pakistan be eliminated?

First, Pakistani border police can strengthen controls along the Afghan-Pakistani border. American Special Forces have played a critical role in stopping infiltrators and training Afghans to patrol their borders over the last two years. But greater Pakistani participation is needed to block insurgents and their supplies.

Second, Pakistani forces can conduct an unconventional war that undermines popular support for the insurgents, captures or kills leaders and guerrillas, and destroys their support network. New Taliban recruits have replaced those killed or captured. Operating behind the scenes in deference to Pakistani sensitivities, the United States could help by providing intelligence and surveillance during the campaign.

Of course, President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan faces serious obstacles to wiping out the insurgent base of support in his country. Since the 9/11 attacks, he has placated the West with unfulfilled promises of reform and crackdowns on extremists and simultaneously catered to Islamic political parties in order to retain their support.

Pushing Mr. Musharraf and Pakistan to act will require finding pressure points. Perhaps the most significant is tying American assistance to Pakistani cooperation. The United States gives Pakistan more than $700 million in military and economic assistance each year. This assistance covers areas like health, economic development, trade and law enforcement. The United States could tie continued assistance in some of these areas - as well as implicit American support in multilateral bodies like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund - to progress in defeating Afghan insurgents and their support network.

The United States can also focus on a second pressure point. President Musharraf wields power through a military government that seized control in 1999. Washington has been remarkably quiet about the shortcomings of democracy in Pakistan. In the absence of cooperation on counterinsurgency, the United States can and should increase pressure on Pakistan to pursue democratic reforms.

With the election of Hamid Karzai as president last year and last week's legislative voting, Afghanistan has made enormous political strides. It would be a shame to see this progress unravel through no fault of Afghanistan's, but through the failure of one of its neighbors to act and of the United States to do anything about it.

Seth G. Jones, a political scientist at the RAND Corporation, is the author of "Establishing Law and Order After Conflict."

Afghans and the Durand line: Rediscovering a common enemy

Globe and Mail Update

Wesh, Afghanistan — Iltaf Shah doesn't feel welcomed when he crosses the border into Afghanistan.

The Pakistani engineer works at a construction site in the Afghan border town of Wesh, building a new border post and passport office. It's not a popular project among Afghans, who say the office is located in the wrong place. Most people around here, and in a surprising number of places elsewhere in Afghanistan, believe the real border lies hundreds of kilometres southeast, deep inside Pakistan.

“You get uneducated people here saying, ‘You're from Pakistan, what are you doing here?'” said the 34-year-old engineer, sitting on the floor of the half-built structure, eating a simple lunch of yogurt, lamb and flatbread.

More violent disagreements are increasingly common on these barren plains. When night falls, the French soldiers stationed near Wesh sometimes hear the crackle of gunfire as border guards take shots at each other. None of the skirmishes has erupted into full-blown warfare, but there's palpable tension along the 2,450-kilometre line, which snakes through this dry region of flatlands and mountains.

It's known as the Durand Line, named after Sir Mortimer Durand, the foreign secretary for India's British colonial government who negotiated with Afghanistan and established the border in 1893. Pakistan says it inherited the border after partition from India, but Afghanistan never formally recognized the demarcation. Most Afghans believe that the Durand agreement was only valid for 100 years, with an understanding that they would take back some territory after 1993.

Any mention of the word Durand — among the young professionals of Kabul, on the dusty streets of Kandahar or inside the claptrap town of Wesh — inspires strong emotions. The name evokes everything Afghans hate about Pakistan — the Islamic insurgents who hide in Pakistan's tribal areas and launch attacks across the border, Pakistan's dominance of the Afghan economy and the alleged role of Pakistan's intelligence services in fuelling two decades of civil war in Afghanistan.

Now that Afghans have found peace with each other, it seems they're also rediscovering their nationalism and old hatreds. While it may seem remarkable that a weak and broken country would pick a fight with a nuclear power and major trading partner, some observers expect the border question to become an explosive issue in the new Afghan parliament.

“It could translate into some big problems. This is the giant pink elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about,” said a Western expert, who asked for anonymity because his organization operates on both sides of the border and hasn't declared a position on what he described as an “extremely sensitive” topic.

Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan's President, has also avoided the question. Observers say he's treading carefully because ordinary Afghans are clamouring for action but the government remains incapable, and unwilling, to do anything as long as Afghanistan remains dependent on foreign assistance.

But that caution extends only so far. Last week, Afghanistan firmly rejected Pakistan's proposal to fence the border, declaring that the demarcation question must be settled first.

Pakistan, meanwhile, has taken other steps to reinforce its claims. Four years ago in Wesh, Pakistanis built a hulking, three-storey brick gateway to mark the border several kilometres inside what Afghans thought was their territory.

In the shadow of that gate, the United States has funded construction of a new, $3.5-million Afghan border post. The Pakistani and Afghan workers on the project have very different views, however, about whether it's a good idea to fix the border's position so concretely.

“As our government becomes stable, Pakistan is worried we will start demanding the Durand agreement,” said Marajudin, 34, the site's doctor, who like many Afghans uses only one name. “Everybody know this land belongs to Afghanistan.”

The Pakistani engineer, Mr. Shah, shook his head. As an ethnic Pashtun he feels kinship with the people on the Afghan side of the border, he said, but that doesn't mean he wants to join Afghanistan.

“The doctor is saying, ‘Join us. We speak the same language we have the same traditions,' ” he said. “We say ‘No. Simply no.' Afghanistan has nothing except weapons. We want peace and freedom.”

Some Afghans say they're willing to fight for the territory. Lagwar, 55, a grizzled former military commander in the southern city of Kandahar, clapped his hands with joy when informed that a journalist would write about the Durand Line.

“If there is one drop of blood in my veins, this is my wish: to capture the Durand Line again,” he said.

Even among the moderate, educated elite in Kabul, the border grievance runs deep.

Baqir Hassan Zada, 25, an accountant who speaks five languages, looked up from a game of cards in the city's central park and scowled when asked whether his country would ever find a lasting peace after so many years of war.

“Not until we deal with Pakistan,” Mr. Zada said. “For many years, Pakistan has been cheating us. Now they're scared of what will happen when we have a strong country.”

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

Semiconductor and other investments in India

GM taps Indian design prowess

NEW DELHI At 9 p.m. in a General Motors research and development laboratory in Warren, Michigan, Anil Sachdev is watching an electron microscope being focused by remote control. A metallurgist across the world in Bangalore, India, is working while Sachdev prepares to head home.

"We're trying to get more horsepower per liter, better fuel economy from future engines," says Sachdev, GM's manager for light-metals research. The 50 employees in Bangalore already have invented ways to make 2009-model cars more gas-efficient, he says.
India is moving from call centers to innovation. GM, General Electric, Texas Instruments and Hewlett-Packard are among companies setting up research institutes to utilize the talents of engineers whom they can pay less than $12,000 a year. A grasp of what works in the marketplace may give India an edge over China, its main low-cost competitor for research, says Larry Burns, a General Motors vice president.
"You couple a sense of entrepreneurship with an extremely intelligent, technically capable people who understand markets, and that's what you see happening in India," says Burns, who heads research, development and strategic planning at the world's largest automaker. "India has a leg up on China."
Some of GM's Indian mathematicians are creating virtual models that limit the need to build real auto prototypes, he says. Others are honing supply-chain technology first developed by Indian companies.
"There's a big difference between knowing math and understanding why math models are important to a business," Burns says.
General Electric has centers in both India and China. The difference is that it has 2,200 scientists, researchers and engineers at the Bangalore campus, compared with 1,000 in Shanghai. GE has 22,000 such employees worldwide.
"Any time we invested in the people in India, we made a tremendous amount of money," says Jeffrey Immelt, GE's chief executive.

GE has sunk $80 million into its five-year-old Bangalore center. Its scientists have applied for 260 patents on products such as synthetic materials and ceramics. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has approved 37, according to Purnima Sahni Mohanty, GE's spokeswoman in India.


Infineon to hire 250 pros in India

BANGALORE: Munich-based semiconductor manufacturer Infineon Technologies plans to hire 250 professionals in India in the next 18 months, a senior company executive said.

Infineon currently has an employee base of 550 and proposes to scale it up to 800 in the next one-and-half-years, its senior vice-president and head of the corporate software group, and managing director of Infineon Technologies India Private Limited, S Surya, said.

The company has already invested $150 million in Indian operations, he said.

He said that seventy per cent of the company's employees in the country were from the software side, and the remaining 30 per cent were from hardware.
Cypress Commits $10M to India
A portion of the funds will go toward building an innovation center.

Cypress Semiconductor said on Monday it will develop a $10-million campus in Bangalore, India, to focus on strategic product design.

The announcement came on the company’s 10th anniversary in India. Cypress expects to triple its India workforce, from about 200 to 600 or more by the end of 2007 to support this initiative.

“We’re looking for a two- to three-acre site to build a Cypress campus,” said Paul Keswick, vice president of new product development at Cypress.

According to Mr. Keswick, CypressIndia design centers will continue supporting all of the company’s business units, including its most important and leading-edge products.

“As we develop new products in such areas as nonvolatile memory and image sensors, these design centers will be a big part of that growth as well,” said Mr. Keswick.

Decade of Development

Cypress opened its first India design center in Bangalore in 1995, specializing in universal serial bus (USB) and static random access memory (SRAM) chips, framers, and clocks.


The Bangalore center’s contributions have included the design of Cypress’s low-speed USB microcontrollers, the 3.3-volt neuron chips for building automation and industrial control networks, and several other developments.

The facility has also played a big role in developing Cypress’s programmable system on a chip (PsoC) mixed signal arrays, according to Mr. Keswick.

Cypress added a second technical center, in Hyderabad, in 2003, which has produced designs for network search engines, 90 nanometer-scale logic devices, and systems engineering.

CypressIndia design teams have acquired more than 40 U.S. patents and published multiple technical papers during the past 10 years.

Australia threatened by Kashmiri terrorists(Lashkar-e-Taiba)

Kashmiri threat 'increased' to Australia


By Simon Kearney

September 19, 2005

THE threat posed to Australia by Kashmiri terrorists has grown, according to secret briefings submitted to a parliamentary committee overseeing the nation's spying agencies.

The committee has been told of new allegations about links between Kashmiri terrorists and Australian residents and citizens. The links emerged in a report on Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) delivered to the parliamentary joint committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD.

The report said there were additional allegations beyond those already in the public domain, but did not elaborate.

The threat posed by LeT emerged when it was revealed the group trained Australian David Hicks and French terror suspect Willie Brigitte. The Australian reported in November 2003 that at least two Sydney residents had been questioned by ASIO about LeT, after Brigitte's deportation.

The report said Australian authorities believed Brigitte was planning to attack Sydney's Lucas Heights nuclear reactor, and had been assigned the task because of his bomb-making expertise.

LeT, which is fighting for the creation of an Islamic state, has mainly been concerned with terrorism in Indian-controlled Kashmir and India. In 2001, it attacked the Indian parliament. But its tactics appear to have changed. "Recent intelligence suggests a trend towards LeT operational activity outside its main theatre of operations," the report said.

Federal Attorney-General Philip Ruddock's statement of reasons for renewing the ban on LeT earlier this year pointed to suggestions about the group;s expanding terrorist operation.

"Senior members of LeT have advocated the group develop an operational interest beyond its principal theatre of operation in Kashmir and India," Mr Ruddock said. "In April 2004, an LeT operational commander was captured by British forces in Iraq."

The committee said LeT had links with other terrorist groups, including in The Philippines. According to Mr Ruddock, LeT "co-operates with al-Qa'ida and other Islamic terrorist groups, both in training and in undertaking operations".

LeT receives most of its funding from expatriate Pakistani communities around the world, particularly in the Persian Gulf and Britain.

Monday, September 19, 2005

3 Pakistani Army officers jailed for Qaeda links(Khalid Sheikh Muhammad was arrested from a major's house)

3 Army officers jailed for Qaeda links

By Mubasher Bukhari

LAHORE: A military court has imprisoned three military officers and ordered the dismissal of three others for having links with Al Qaeda, sources told Daily Times on Sunday.

Col Khalid Abbasi, Major Adil Qudoos, Col Abdul Ghaffar, Maj Attaullah, Capt Dr Usman Zafar and Major Rohail Faraz were tried by a military court in Panu Aqil Cantonment in August after they were arrested and then interrogated at Attock Fort, the source said.

The military court, comprising Major General Ahmad Nawaz and Brigadier Mumtaz Iqbal, sentenced Maj Qudoos to 10 years in prison, Col Khalid Abbasi to six months and Col Abdul Ghaffar to three years. Maj Attaullah, Maj Faraz and Capt Zafar were dismissed.

Maj Qudoos, an officer of the Signal Battalion, was arrested on March 1, 2003 after Al Qaeda number three Khalid Sheikh Muhammad was arrested from his Rawalpindi house. Col Khalid Abbasi was posted at Signal Centre Kohat before his arrest on May 30, 2003. Col Ghaffar was serving at the Army Aviation Headquarter before his arrest on March 4, 2004.

Daily Times asked Inter Services Public Relation for comment, but Maj Shahid Abbas of the ISPR’s Lahore Office said that only ISPR Director General Maj Gen Shaukat Sultan was authorised to comment. Gen Sultan is accompanying President Pervez Musharraf in the United States.

Friday, September 16, 2005

Harris Interacive poll. American opinions of countries

Man indicted in Virginia Jihad Network case(With ties to Lashkar-e-Taiba)

Md. man accused in 'jihad network' probe

The Associated Press

Posted: Friday September 16th, 2005, 11:30 AM
Last Updated: Friday September 16th, 2005, 11:30 AM

WASHINGTON (AP) - A Maryland man was charged with conspiracy to help a terrorist organization, part of an investigation of the "Virginia jihad network" that has so far resulted in 10 convictions, U.S. law enforcement officials said Friday.

Ali Asad Chandia of College Park, Md., is named in a four-count indictment alleging he conspired to provide material support to the Lashkar-e-Taiba organization, which the U.S. designated a terrorist organization in 2001. Chandia was arrested Thursday at his home, assistant Attorney General Alice Fisher said.

The indictment was returned on Wednesday and unsealed Friday after Chandia's arrest.

Also charged is Mohammed Ajmal Khan of Coventry, England, who prosecutors say is a senior official in Lashkar-e-Taiba, an Islamic rebel group fighting for independence in the India-controlled portion of Kashmir. Khan already is in custody in England on terrorism charges.

Ali al-Timimi, who authorities called the spiritual leader of the Virginia jihad network, was sentenced to life in prison in July after being convicted of soliciting treason and other charges. Prosecutors say al-Timimi wielded enormous influence among a group of young Muslim men in northern Virginia who played paintball games in 2000 and 2001 in preparation for holy war around the globe.

Nine other members of the group have been convicted for their roles in the conspiracy, with prison terms ranging from three years to life.

Pakistani general blames U.S., Afghan forces for surge in rebel attacks in Afghanistan

Pakistani general blames U.S., Afghan forces for surge in rebel attacks in Afghanistan

Associated Press
Sept. 15, 2005 09:00 AM
MIRAN SHAH, Pakistan - Pakistani troops are "covering each inch" of the rugged northwestern border with Afghanistan, a general claimed Thursday, disputing criticism that his country isn't doing enough to keep out militants.

"We have had no reports of anyone crossing (from Pakistan) for many months," Maj. Gen. Mohammed Akram Sahi told reporters shuttled to the scene of what the military called its biggest operation against al-Qaida in the North Wazirstan tribal area.

"The al-Qaida stronghold ... has been eliminated," Sahi said, referring to a reputed al-Qaida hide-out in an Islamic religious school, or madrassa, which security forces overran this week.
advertisement



He said seven more suspected militants were arrested in the area Thursday, raising the operation's total to 28. None have been publicly identified, but officials say they include foreigners.

Afghanistan's top police official said Thursday that Osama bin Laden is strongly believed to be hiding in Pakistan's tribal regions along the Afghan border after fleeing Afghanistan.

"It isn't possible for him to be (in Afghanistan) because of all the international forces here," Interior Minister Ali Ahmad Jalali told reporters, referring a U.S.-led force of 20,000 fighting a rejuvenated Taliban-led insurgency in southern and eastern Afghanistan and 11,000 NATO troops in the north and west.

Jalali's statement came amid concerns of increased Taliban attacks in Afghanistan ahead of landmark legislative elections there Sunday meant to boost stability after a quarter-century of conflict.

However, Pakistani Lt. Gen. Safdar Hussain, who is leading thousands of troops in the border hunt for militants, said no senior terror figure such as bin Laden could be in the tribal areas because they have been "so well sanitized" - cleared of militants or their supporters.

An American military spokesman in Afghanistan, Col. James Yonts, told The Associated Press on Wednesday that the United States does not know where bin Laden is.

Hussain also blamed a surge in Taliban attacks in Afghanistan ahead of Sunday's vote on a lack of authority by the Afghan National Army and the U.S.-led coalition.

"They have not given the effort to (secure) the east and south that they have to the center and west of Afghanistan," he said. Taliban rebel attacks have been especially numerous in the east and south, much of which border Pakistan.

Hussain said an additional 5,000 Pakistani troops were deployed in July to secure the border, and helicopter surveillance will be carried out along the rugged frontier as the Afghan vote approaches. That deployment adds to more than 70,000 soldiers already on the border.

At the madrassa complex, in an office surrounded by 10-foot-high sandbag barriers and guarded by a half-dozen armed troops on the roof, Sahi showed off large quantities of ammunition, field telephones, machine guns, grenades and army hats and boots confiscated during the raid.

He said Pakistan has 218 army posts along the border in North Wazirstan, compared with 40 run by the U.S. military and Afghan army on the Afghan side in Khost and Paktika provinces.

"We are covering each inch of the area," Sahi said.

U.S. and Afghan officials have said Taliban militants enter Afghanistan through Pakistan's tribal regions. Hussain said that under his command, patrolling along the Afghan border has increased, and troops are in posts every half-mile on the 370-mile section of frontier.

"We consider Afghanistan as a country where stability or instability directly affect the stability of Pakistan," he said, pledging that Pakistan would do all it could to see that the elections are "peaceful and smooth."

In recent operations, security forces shut down four madrassas used for terrorist activities and arrested eight men from a list of 173 - mostly Pakistan clergymen - wanted for involvement in militancy, he said.

Pakistan was a close ally of the Taliban before it switched sides following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and became Washington's ally in the war against terrorism. A U.S.-led military campaign ousted the Taliban from power in Afghanistan in late 2001.

Thursday, September 15, 2005

Indians trust their military, Pakistani trust their religious leaders

Indians trust military and police, Pakistanis don’t: BBC survey

LONDON: Most Indians trust the military and police more than their politicians while the Pakistanis trusted religious leaders, according to the findings of the Gallup International Voice of the People Survey 2005 commissioned by the BBC World Service

The poll surveyed more than 50,000 people in 68 countries, representing the views of 1.3 billion citizens. It also found that most Pakistanis believed their religion was more important than nationality. Little control: On the question of which people were most trusted, 61 percent of the surveyed Indians cited the military and the police, 58 percent said journalists, while only one percent trusted politicians.

Of the surveyed Pakistanis, 55 percent trusted religious leaders, 42 percent journalists, 31 percent politicians and businessmen and 29 percent the military and police. Globally, only 13 percent trusted politicians.

Two-thirds of Indians did not feel their elections were free and fair. About 77 percent of surveyed Indians did not believe their country was governed by the will of the people, not far from the global average.

On the question of who had the most influence on decisions taken in personal lives, 92 percent of surveyed Indians said family and partner, compared to only 45 percent of Pakistanis. A total of 18 percent Pakistanis answered religious leader, while none of the Indians surveyed did.

A total of 68 percent Indians and 53 percent Pakistanis agreed that there was very little they could do to change their lives. The global average was 34 percent. The two countries were almost identical in who they would choose to give more power to – around 55 percent chose the military and intellectuals and 50 percent journalists.

A total of 1,063 Indians and 843 Pakistanis were surveyed in June.

Pakistanis 'put religion first'


Pakistanis 'put religion first'

Most Pakistanis believe their religion is more important than nationality while Indians trust the police and army more than their politicians.

These were two of the findings of the Gallup International Voice of the People survey 2005, commissioned by the BBC World Service.

The poll surveyed more than 50,000 people in 68 countries, representing the views of 1.3bn citizens.

Its findings explore the global attitudes to power.

Little control

On the question of which people were most trusted, 61% of the surveyed Indians cited the military and police, and 58% said journalists, while only 1% trusted politicians.

On the question of who had the most influence on decisions taken in personal lives, 92% of surveyed Indians said family and partner, compared to only 45% of Pakistanis. A total of 18% of Pakistanis answered religious leader, while none of the Indians surveyed did.

Wednesday, September 14, 2005

3 American copters intrude into Pakistan(40 kms)

3 American copters intrude into Pakistan

By Mukarram Khan

GHALANAI: Three US helicopters intruded 40 kilometres into Pakistani tribal area in Mohmand Agency on Wednesday.

Witnesses told local reporters that the helicopters entered at the Khuwazai border area and advanced towards the Khanch check post at low altitude. The helicopters then returned to Afghanistan. However, no official confirmation of the intrusion of American helicopters was available.

Wall Street Journal: I Is For Infidel

I Is For Infidel
By Kathy Gannon
PublicAffairs, 186 pages, $25

With Friends Like Pakistan…

By MASOOD FARIVAR
September 14, 2005; Page D14

It was a scene straight out of a John le Carré novel, the kind of cloak-and-dagger rendezvous that CIA spooks can only fantasize about. The time: November 2004. The place: a compound deep inside the Old City of Peshawar on Pakistan's rugged northwest frontier. The participants: Karim, a 30-something former Afghan mujahideen fighter; Mohammed Hakim, a slightly younger, bearded representative of a Taliban splinter group holding three United Nations workers hostage in Afghanistan; and Kathy Gannon, a correspondent for Associated Press.


Hakim explained to Ms. Gannon the purpose of the abduction: to "put an end to the boasting of the Afghan government, the United Nations and the U.S. administration about the uneventful presidential election" in Afghanistan that had taken place only a month before, the one that had elected Hamid Karzai president.

The group, even more militant in its opposition to Mr. Karzai and his pro-Western government than erstwhile Taliban leader Mullah Omar, was divided over whether to kill the hostages. Karim claimed to sympathize with their plight and to understand that the abduction wasn't winning the Taliban any friends. Still, he said that he had little choice. It was a surreal meeting in many ways, but what made it especially remarkable to Ms. Gannon was how relaxed Hakim seemed. A well-known Taliban terrorist, he was supposedly a wanted man in Pakistan. Why did he seem so nonchalant? Soon enough the reason became clear.

Karim abruptly ended the conversation and headed out to his waiting car. Ms. Gannon caught a glimpse of the license plate -- it started with the number 83. From her years of experience she had learned that, in Pakistan, such a number belongs only to plates that have been issued by the ISI, Pakistan's military intelligence service. This numeric talisman confirmed what she had long suspected: that three years after Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's president, had made an about-face and ditched the Taliban under U.S. pressure, his military intelligence service was still offering support to Islamist groups, including a resurgent Taliban.

Well before we come across this anecdote in "I Is for Infidel" (PublicAffairs, 186 pages, $25), we have grown accustomed to Ms. Gannon's enterprising instincts and, not least, her eye for the telling detail. Her closely observed chronicle of Afghanistan's descent into chaos, and its attempts to rebound, is full of vivid incident and astute analysis. She conveys with particular skill the Afghans' sense of despair as the world abandoned them and their country slid into anarchy, only to be taken over by the Taliban and al Qaeda.

For causing this tragedy Ms. Gannon takes everyone to task: the former anti-Soviet mujahideen for turning their country into a killing field and for committing unspeakable crimes; the U.N. for ignoring the Taliban's gruesome rule in the forlorn hope that to do so would promote peace; and the U.S. for failing to court moderate Taliban members and later for sacrificing Afghanistan's security for the sake of prosecuting the war in Iraq. But she saves her sharpest indictment for Pakistan's military and intelligence service. She argues that it has been in cahoots with terrorist groups for decades, groups driven by a "jihad ideology" according to which Islam justifies all kinds of violence.

The military's omnipresence in Pakistani life, Ms. Gannon notes, is in part a legacy of British rule, under which Hindus dominated the civilian bureaucracy and Muslims the military. When the British left, a feudal ruling class arose. Its members included, alongside major landowners, military men with a strong religious sense of mission and no interest in establishing democratic institutions. As one Pakistani general tells Ms. Gannon: "Jihad has always been a motivating concept for our troops from day one." The concept motivated Pakistan's military all the more forcefully, in the decades after independence, with each of Pakistan's humiliating defeats at the hands of India.

Of course, religion is only part of the story. For as long as it has existed, Pakistan has seen Afghanistan as a source of "strategic depth" in its conflict with India. To that end it has backed pro-Pakistan groups in Afghanistan, groups that often have Islamic roots. Whether Pakistan has been led by the secular Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in the 1970s or by the fundamentalist Zia ul-Haq in the 1980s or by the pro-Western Gen. Musharraf in recent years, the policy has remained the same.

But it took a toxic turn with the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which allowed the Pakistani military to turn what started off as a national war of liberation into a holy war that it would serve in whatever way it could. The Taliban, founded as a populist movement to end Afghanistan's anarchy following the Soviets' withdrawal, became a pawn in this game. The ISI, with generous U.S. funding, played a crucial role throughout: It decided which of its favorite Afghan Islamist groups was to receive weapons, and it created a curriculum to teach a generation of Afghan refugee boys that "I is for infidel" and "J is for jihad."

"In hindsight," writes Ms. Gannon, "it was a mistake [for the West] to support Zia and his Islamic fervor, which gave rise to extremist militants." It was also a mistake to support Gen. Musharraf, whose military "is strangling Pakistan's civil society and protecting the religious right." So compelling is Ms. Gannon's case that by the end of the book, when she asserts almost in passing that Osama bin Laden may well be under the protection of the Pakistani military, it is easy to believe her.

It is all a cautionary tale about alliances of convenience. But will anyone listen? "Afghanistan's tragedy," Ms. Gannon observes in her epilogue, "is that to the world's powers, it has never really mattered -- or mattered for long."

Mr. Farivar is a reporter for Dow Jones Newswires.

Tuesday, September 13, 2005

Musharraf: Women get raped so they can get asylum in Canada

Musharraf: No Challenge From Bush On Reversal
Pakistani President Still Leading Army
By Glenn Kessler and Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, September 13, 2005; A19

Musharraf also became animated when he spoke about the case of Mukhtar Mai, a 33-year-old illiterate woman who spoke publicly about having been gang-raped on the orders of village council in 2002. Mai, bucking taboos, won public sympathy and government support after she demanded that the men be charged and convicted. But earlier this year Musharraf earned the ire of the Bush administration when he blocked her from traveling to the United States to publicize the case.

Musharraf said that Mai was free to travel now -- though she has never left Pakistan -- and that he had no regrets about how he handled the incident. He said Mai had come under the sway of organizations determined to harm Pakistan's image and he did not think Pakistan "should be singled out when the curse is everywhere in the world." He noted he had seen reports or figures about rape in the United States, Canada, France and Britain showing that "it is happening everywhere."

"You must understand the environment in Pakistan," Musharraf added. "This has become a moneymaking concern. A lot of people say if you want to go abroad and get a visa for Canada or citizenship and be a millionaire, get yourself raped."

Monday, September 12, 2005

Pakistan trained suicide bombers arrested in Kabul

'Suicide bombers' held in Kabul

Afghan officials say they have arrested two people they believe were intending to carry out suicide bomb attacks in the capital, Kabul.

The officials told the BBC the two men were found with explosives on them when they were arrested.

The past year has seen the worst violence in Afghanistan since 2001.

There are fears of more attacks by the Taleban and other militant groups in the run up to parliamentary elections on Sunday.

Particular target

The suspected suicide bombers were arrested on Sunday, officials said, in a central area of Kabul.

Two vehicles were also seized in the operation, they said.

The officials said they believed the two men had been trained in neighbouring Pakistan, although they did not provide any evidence.

Afghan officials in the past have accused the Pakistani authorities of failing to prevent extremists operating on their soil who then infiltrate Afghanistan.

There have been several suicide bomb attacks this year. The last one in Kabul in May killed three people.

An official said Kabul was on high alert because it was a particular target before polling day.

Pakistan not yet on the outsourcing map

Pakistan not yet on the outsourcing map

Despite a late start, Pakistan’s information technology entrepreneurs and the government are hoping to make it big in the global marketplace for outsourcing of IT-enabled services. How have other countries succeeded and where does Pakistan stand?

Naween A. Mangi spoke from New York to Ron Hira, professor of public policy at the Rochester Institute of Technology, and Rafiq Dossani, senior research scholar at the Asia Pacific Research Centre of Stanford University.

SOFTWARE exports, call centres and medical transcription firms have become all the rage over the last three years. Young entrepreneurs are returning after years spent working at major tech firms in the US to start up their own ventures and the government is forecasting that IT will be the next big thing in Pakistan’s economy.

So far, the numbers tell a less-than-compelling story. In 2004, although the software and IT enabled services business was worth $300 million, (including hardware the figure is $600 million), exports and outsourcing made up for just $33 million of that. By comparison, India logged $12.8 billion in software and services exports in 2004.

Still, the Pakistan Software Export Board, a federal body set up to promote outsourcing, forecasts that the business will grow by at least 45 per cent annually for the next five years. A lot of that growth will come from call centres and business process outsourcing which last year made up one-fourth of total exports. In the next ten years, the PSEB aims to be at the top of the class of tier two global IT companies.

But as experts and practitioners agree, Pakistan will need more than ambitious aims to meet that goal. Prof Ron Hira, whose new book Outsourcing America assesses the impact on the US job market, says the outsourcing industry is set for rapid growth in the next few years and if done right, developing countries like Pakistan could benefit from the boom.

Hira is an expert who has testified before the US Congress on the implications of outsourcing. “Pakistan isn’t on the map yet,” he says. “India dominates what most people think about [when it comes to outsourcing].”

Rafiq Dossani, an expert on outsourcing and a senior research scholar at Stanford University says there are several reasons for that. First, is the poor quality of infrastructure.

“When the Internet tanked recently, that created a really bad perception that the country has not thought through even the most rudimentary aspects,” Dossani says. “Deregulation in this area is too limited.” He says that while voice services have benefited from the deregulation, data services are still uncompetitive.

He says there are too many stumbling blocks since bandwidth is more expensive than in other countries. “The costs are outrageous at four or five times what they should be,” he says.

Dossani identifies the thin segment of English speakers as a second hurdle in the way of a flourishing outsourcing industry in Pakistan. “Of the 30 per cent of the population that lives in urban Pakistan, one tenth speak English that’s good enough to work at a call centre,” he says. “And of those five million or so, only about one million are available to come into this field as the rest are working elsewhere.”

Then, he says poor marketing also holds the industry back. “You just don’t see the trade body [in Pakistan] working like India’s Nasscom to project a positive image,” he says. “The Pakistani diaspora has done well and there is a great need to better use that network.”

He forecasts that the outsourcing business in Pakistan can be at least $1 billion in size but says this is only possible if alliances are formed with countries like India and China.

“The Philippines has done well by understanding that it cannot reach critical mass on its own and therefore forming alliances and pitching themselves as a second location to offset country risk,” he says. Dossani also says Pakistan has the advantage of a highly skilled group of entrepreneurs which “is the reason why the tiny industry does exist.”

Hira adds that since Pakistan entered into the industry late, playing catch up is an inevitable need. However, the sector can take advantage of the circumstances in other countries. “India has done a lot of things right,” he says. “They have been successful at not just attracting foreign investment but also building their own companies and leveraging the large Indian diaspora,” Hira says.

“India is also so talked about that people are comfortable doing business there. But since wages are rising, Pakistan can use that as an entry point.” He says that while countries like India have accumulated critical mass and scale, others are distinguishing themselves in different ways.

Eastern European wages are slightly higher than Pakistan and companies in that region have specialized in near-shoring by targeting the European market. Russia, meantime, is aiming at the U.S. market in both services and manufacturing while the Philippines and Malaysia are targeting services.

“The question really is how you separate yourself from the pack,” Hira says. “You can compete on price to a certain extent but you have to offer something more to distinguish yourself.”

He says U.S. companies are now moving from pilot stage outsourcing to full deployment which indicates both the success of the pilot projects and the rapid growth that is likely to come in the outsourcing market for the next few years. “There will continue to be a backlash from U.S. workers, but by and large there has not been any real policy movement to restrict outsourcing so there is still a large opportunity,” he says.

Hira admits that the extent to which a growing outsourcing industry ties into the broader economy in terms of job creation remains unclear but he says, other advantages emerge. “In India, for example, it remains unclear that they’ve been able to link the benefits [from outsourcing] back in, but the big benefit is that they have created world class management which can then move into other sectors.”

Therefore, Hira recommends that Pakistan take a long-term vision not for the next three or five years but for the next two decades. “Right now you can try to pick up the low hanging fruit and absorb the excess demand but don’t just think about attracting the individual company to come [to Pakistan],” he says. “Think about how this will fit into the larger set of skills for your country so that you can differentiate yourself much later down the road.”

Sunday, September 11, 2005

50 Christian families flee: Blasphemy backlash

‘Blasphemy’ backlash: 50 Christian families flee Amer Sidhu

* Muslim community leaders appeal for calm
* ‘Blasphemy’ accused has confessed, says police

By Aayan Ali and Ali Waqar


LAHORE: Some 50 Christian families have fled Waheed Park in Chungi Amer Sidhu fearing a backlash from the Muslim community after a Christian was arrested for alleged blasphemy.

Factory Area police registered a blasphemy case against Younis Masih, 40, on Saturday night after he allegedly made derogatory remarks about the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) at a Qawali, arranged by another Christian, on Friday night. Following the incident, Younis was beaten up by local Christians who wanted him to apologise, and then by an angry mob of Muslims, but he refused to take back his comments, according to witnesses.

On Saturday night, some 200 protestors carrying sticks surrounded Factory Area police station demanding a case be registered against Younis, and refused to leave until they were shown copies of the FIR.

By Sunday, some 50 Christian families had fled the area.

Muslim community leaders told Daily Times they had made repeated assurances of peace to the Christians, saying they only wanted Younis punished. They admitted that some Muslims had damaged Younis’s house, but said the damage was minor. “We have made repeated announcements in the mosques that people should control their emotions,” said Tariq Mahmood, a local leader. “We also assured the Christian community that they would be safe here, but they left.”

He said people were much calmer now and community leaders had managed to disperse a small protest against the incident on Sunday morning. However, he said the whole community was determined to see Younis get punished under the law. “If the police try to hush up the investigation, we will not keep quiet.” The police sent Younis to Kot Lakhpat Jail on Sunday morning, after he confessed to the investigation officer of the case, Sub Inspector Abdul Rasheed, said Karamat, the duty officer at Factory Area police station. He said Younis would not have been safe in the lock-up at the police station. The investigation officer was not available for comment. Earlier, police told Daily Times that Younis’s wife had shown up at Factory Area police station with tattered clothes saying a group of Muslims looking for her husband had done this to her. The police said they would investigate her complaint as well.

Shahzad Tanweer was trained by Pakistani militant groups

The jihadist who needed no brainwashing to blow up Aldgate train

By Ian Herbert and Kim Sengupta

Published: 10 September 2005

To his friends he was known simply by his Urdu nickname "Khaka". In the two months since detonating a bomb that killed six people on the London Underground, Shahzad Tanweer has been portrayed as the naive victim of brainwashing by a svengali, his fellow bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan.

But The Independent has uncovered a different picture of Tanweer, one in which the Aldgate bomber is a highly focussed, motivated and independent jihadist, who spent time - without Khan - at a terrorist training camp in Pakistan run by a group linked to the kidnap and murder of an American journalist. He also helped lead a gang in the Beeston district of Leeds that introduced radical Islam to Asian youths and engaged in battles with whites.

The training camp Tanweer visited in Pakistan was run by Harkat-ul-Mujahedeen (the "Movement for Holy Warriors"), a group that had been involved in the kidnap and beheading of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in 2002 and which trains fighters operating alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

One of Tanweer's former associates said the bomber had received lessons in handling arms and explosives at the camp in Mansehra, a remote area near the Kashmir border, in December and January. This is corroborated by sources in Pakistan, one of whom claims that he had two stints at the camp. Tanweer is known to have visited Pakistan between last November and February with Khan. But Pakistani sources who place Tanweer at Mansehra cannot recall him being accompanied by Khan or any other British Muslim.

The man who organised the kidnapping of Pearl, Omar Saeed Sheikh, was another British-born Muslim who had joined Harkat. Security sources in Britain say they have not yet found any link between Tanweer and Sheikh.

Tanweer, travelling on passport number 453897014, and Khan, number 04069095, arrived in Karachi via Istanbul on Turkish Airline flight TK-1056 on 19 November last year. They left for Lahore by train a week later before moving on to Faisalabad where, according to Pakistani security sources, their trail disappeared before they surfaced again in Britain on 8 February.

A month before he showed up at Mansehra, Tanweer is known to have been in Chak 477, 28 miles from Faisalabad, where he visited his father's family. His time there provides more evidence of his obsessive pursuit of jihad.

Young men usually play cricket in Chak's main street but Tanweer - a talented batsman - had no interest. Instead, he wanted to pursue several of the groups who were expounding the jihadi cause. According to Tahir Pervaiz, his uncle, the family was so concerned that attempts were made to keep him inside the house. "Osama bin Laden was Shahzad's idol and he used to discuss the man with his cousins and friends in the village," said Mr Pervaiz.

Tanweer seems to have spent time with Khan at Chak. Khan made a number of trips from Rawalpindi, where he was staying at the the house of an uncle, according to Mr Pervaiz.

The link between the two men dates back to the 1980s. In recent years their friendship had developed into membership of a 15-strong group of Asian youths known as "The Mullah Crew".

The group's meeting points included a local Iqra Islamic bookshop, which was raided by police after the bombings, and a gym beneath Beeston's Hardy Street mosque. Their radicalism was so blatant that the gym became known as the "al-Qa'ida gym", according to Tanweer's associates. But many were prepared to overlook this because the leaders of the Mullah Crew were known for energising many disenchanted Muslim boys whose heroin abuse was giving the Asian community a bad name.

Tanweer seems to have been integral to this process. "He and the Mullah Crew cleared up the area," said a source. "Lads would be taken by the group and put through cold turkey by locking them in a room for five days."

The Mullah Crew's emphasis was on strengthening the young Asians physically, often through outdoor activities like paintballing, climbing in the North Yorkshire Moors and canoeing in North Wales. Tanweer was more committed than most and he is particularly remembered for a paintballing trip in which he proved superb with the gun. "He was approaching it like a proper soldier," said the source.

Islam was also a part of the Mullah Crew's creed of clean living. "To be invited on one of these outings you had to be a part of their religious set," said another source. "They would not take lads who had become too 'Westernised' for their liking."

Another Mullah Crew trip saw an ill-equipped group go half-way up Mont Blanc before they were forced to head back. "Going without the proper equipment made it seem as if they were testing their strength for the jihad; testing their faith," said the source.

It appears that Tanweer took every aspect of life seriously, from cricket (he batted for Shaan B in the Quaid E Azam Yorkshire league) to snooker (he rejected the usual, smoke-filled clubs in favour of the Northern Club in Leeds, which has its own coach).

When it came to guarding what he perceived to be his territory, his independent spirit sometimes led to violence. The windows of his family's chip shop were smashed after fights broke out between white and Asian youths in Beeston. Tanweer seems to have planned to get his own back. "He was part of a group which planned to go to the white part of Beeston and get some revenge," said a source.

The feud resulted in a fight that led to the death of Tyrone Clarke, 16, at the hands of a gang of Asian youths in April 2004. Tanweer had no involvement in the murder but did receive a caution for a public order offence arising out of the gang battles.

When it came to organising the bombings, Tanweer was determined to take on tasks. He booked the Nissan Micra rental car that would take him, Khan and Hasib Hussain to Luton railway station on 7 July.

At least one family member has suggested there were hints of what he planned in his demeanour. "[The family] were watching a documentary on Muslims in Britain [in May]," she said. "Shahzad was convinced there would be a battle between Muslims and the West. [He said] 'You'd better get out of here. Everyone's going to hate you'."

Friday, September 09, 2005

US officials brief Indian team on Patriot missile system

US officials brief Indian team on Patriot missile system

NEW DELHI: American defence officials showcased the latest version of the Patriot missile defence system at classified briefings for their Indian counterparts, offering for sale military equipment made available to an exclusive club of countries, an official said on Friday.

The US offer to sell India the Patriot Advance Capability 3 missile system, also called PAC 3, as well as F-A/18 Hornet and F-16 fighter planes is the result of a sweeping alliance emerging between the two countries, whose relations were frosty during the Cold War.

“Outside of a handful of treaty allies, a few close allies ... (in all) only eight or 10 countries have been given this briefing so far,” Lt Gen Jeffrey Kohler, director of the Pentagon’s Defence Security Cooperation Agency, told a news conference.

India is a crucial new market for the United States. Kohler said it was his third visit in 10 months. One of Russia’s biggest military customers since the Soviet days, India has also bought hardware from Israel in recent years and is now exploring business with the United States. The US-made Patriot missile systems, designed to intercept and destroy incoming ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and enemy aircraft, are pitted against Russian and Israeli systems that are also being considered by India.

“The Patriot 3 system has very many capabilities against current threats, particularly against weapons of mass destruction,” Kohler said at the end of meetings this week.

Asked about comments by officials in Pakistan, who have publicly opposed the proposed Patriot sale, saying it will trigger an arms race in South Asia, Kohler said that “in my last visit to India and Pakistan, it wasn’t an issue.”

Officials from the US Air Force and navy, as well as US aircraft-makers Boeing Co and Lockheed Martin Corp have also attended the briefings, where electronic warfare systems, radars and night vision devices were also discussed, Kohler said.

Boeing and Lockheed officials held talks with officials of India’s state-run Hindustan Aeronautics Limited to take forward plans to jointly produce multi-role fighter planes, he said. US military officials showed to their potential buyers images of “battle-damaged aircraft hit by missiles, that had made it back safely.” ap

No civilian nuclear deal with Pak: US

No civilian nuclear deal with Pak: US

From Our Special Correspondent
WASHINGTON: — Stating that the United States entered into a civilian nuclear co-operation agreement as an exception, a senior State Department official ruled out the possibility of such an accord with Pakistan.
“We view India as an exceptional case, and see civil nuclear co-operation as a mechanism to deepen further India’s commitment to international non-proliferation,” Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph told a congressional hearing.
In an interview with an American news agency circulated Thursday, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the United States Jehangir Karamat sought for Islamabad the same access to U.S. civilian nuclear technology that President George W. Bush has proposed for India.
Ambassador Karamat warned that “the balance of power in South Asia should not become so tilted in India’s favour, as a result of the U.S. relationship with India, that Pakistan has to start taking extraordinary measures to ensure a capability for deterrence and defence.”
But in his testimony to the House International Relations Committee here, Under Secretary Joseph said, “Some have asked whether it might be possible to extend such co-operation to Israel and Pakistan — the only other two (de facto weapon) states that did not join the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT),” he said, adding, “India, Israel and Pakistan are each unique and require different approaches.”
“Neither Pakistan nor Israel has a civil nuclear energy programme that approximates at of India. The United States has no plans to seek full civil nuclear co-operation with Israel or Pakistan,” he told the House International Relations Committee here.
He said people have questioned the rationale behind inking a civil nuclear co-operation pact with India as it was not a signatory to the NPT and have asked why a cap on India’s production of fissile material for weapons was not part of the deal.
“The United States does not and will not support India’s nuclear weapons programme,” Joseph said, adding: “Our initiative with India in no way recognizes India as an NPT nuclear weapon state and we will not seek to renegotiate the NPT. We remain cognizant of and will fully uphold all of our obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. We remain committed to universal NPT adherence.
“But we also recognize that India is a special case and see a clear need to come to terms with it. India never became a party to the NPT. In fact, India was very hostile toward the Treaty for many years. With its decision to take the steps announced in the Joint Statement, India will now take on new nonproliferation responsibilities that will strengthen global nonproliferation efforts and serve the fundamental purpose of the NPT.
“India has informed us that it has no intention of becoming a party to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state at this time. Despite this, it is important to seize this opportunity to assist India in becoming a more constructive partner in our global nonproliferation efforts. Indian commitments to be undertaken in the context of the Joint Statement will align this critical state more closely with the global nonproliferation regime than at any time previously. India has said it wants to be a partner and is willing to take important steps to this end. We should encourage such steps in this case by offering tangible benefits in return.
“We remain committed to achieving an Indian cessation of fissile material production for weapons, and we have strongly encouraged a move in this direction. However, achieving the physical separation of civilian and military infrastructure would be a significant step forward. And we jointly agreed to work toward the completion of an effective Fissile Material Cut Off Treaty, even as the United States stands willing to explore other intermediate options that also might serve this objective.
“As India completes those nonproliferation actions that it has agreed to undertake in the Joint Statement, I am convinced that the nonproliferation regime will emerge stronger as a result. Separately, we will continue to encourage additional steps, such as India’s acceptance of a fissile material production moratorium or cap, but we will not insist on it for the purposes of the civil nuclear cooperation initiative announced by the President and Prime Minister. Even absent such a cap, the initiative represents a substantial net gain for nonproliferation. It is a win for our strategic relationship, a win for energy security, and a win for nonproliferation”

Update: Dawn report

No N-parity with India, US tells Pakistan: Congressional hearing

WASHINGTON, Sept 9: The Bush administration used an open congressional hearing on Friday to inform Pakistan that it cannot get the same nuclear cooperation as granted to India under the Indo-US nuclear deal. The US policy statement came hours after a news agency published an interview with Ambassador Jehangir Karamat, saying that Pakistan should have the same access to civilian nuclear technology that President Bush has proposed for India.

Later, at a hearing of the House International Relations Committee, Congressman Dan Burton pleaded Islamabad’s case and demanded an answer by the two senior State Department officials testifying before the committee.

Both the officials — Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Nicholas Burns and Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs Robert Joseph – told the committee that the Bush administration was not planning to give equal treatment to India and Pakistan on the nuclear issue. “In the context of providing full assistance or full trade on the civilian side (to Pakistan), that is something that we don’t think we are prepared to do,” Mr Joseph said.

Ambassador Karamat’s interview, given last week but published on Wednesday when the first congressional hearing on the US offer to India began, was seen in Washington as a bold diplomatic move.

“Mr Karamat perhaps also wanted to take the temperature of the congressional committee after the Pakistani foreign minister held the first publicised meeting with his Israeli counterpart,” said a diplomatic observer present at the hearing.

The two State Department officials, however, made it clear that Washington has no plan for extending nuclear cooperation to Islamabad.

They cited two reasons for Washington’s refusal: Pakistan does not have the same energy requirements as India and its nuclear power programme is not significant. The other reason was Pakistan’s “non-proliferation record.”

Explaining the Bush administration’s reasons for offering a nuclear deal to New Delhi, Mr Burns said: “India has demonstrated a strong commitment to protection of fissile materials and nuclear technology, and we believe it’s now time to end the isolation of India and to integrate it into non-proliferation norms.”

U.S.: Pakistani Extremists Aid Terrorists(Lashkar and other Pakistani jihadi groups)

September 9, 2005

U.S.: Pakistani Extremists Aid Terrorists

Filed at 5:23 a.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Al-Qaida leaders in hiding and foot-soldiers preparing for terrorist attacks are turning to outlawed Pakistani extremist groups for spiritual and military training, shelter and logistical support, say U.S. officials who see them as an emerging threat.

One group -- Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, or Army of the Pure -- is an example of how Osama bin Laden's followers take advantage of scattered Islamic militant allies to maintain momentum, four years after a U.S.-led military campaign destroyed al-Qaida camps in Afghanistan.

Lashkar is among the organizations fighting for the disputed region of Kashmir. U.S. officials say the group stands out for a number of reasons, including its missionary work and other involvement outside the area.

Elements of Pakistan's intelligence services have supported Lashkar in the past. Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, banned Lashkar in 2002 for its alleged links to an attack on India's parliament.

Lashkar leaders insist the group's focus is freeing Muslims in Indian-controlled Kashmir -- not attacks on the West. Pakistani officials say the group is local, not international.

Pakistan's ambassador to the U.S., Jehangir Karamat, said in an Associated Press interview that he considers Lashkar incapable of international terrorism and particularly of working with al-Qaida because the groups have different languages and agendas.

Al-Qaida has ''no linkage with any organization in Pakistan,'' Karamat said. ''They don't need it and they don't have it -- never had it.''

Still, the United States is closely watching Lashkar because of its apparent willingness to help those involved in the global jihad on a grass-roots level.

The U.S. officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity, said they do not believe Lashkar's leadership is coordinating international attacks with groups including the remnants of al-Qaida. Instead, they worry about connections among foot-soldiers -- extremists who may point friends of friends to paramilitary camps.

Last year, the State Department estimated the group had several thousand members.

The Lashkar organization represents a classic example of the diffusion of Islamic extremism -- based in Afghanistan until the U.S. toppled the Taliban in 2001 -- that CIA Director Porter Goss and other intelligence officials have warned of.

Ken Katzman, a Middle East expert at the Congressional Research Service, said groups including Lashkar have revived the training structure once found in Afghanistan, setting up ''Afghanistan East'' in northern Pakistan. Some in Pakistan deny the camps' existence.

''I think this is emerging as the next theater to test whether Pakistan is serious about eliminating the al-Qaida presence,'' Katzman said.

Some examples of high-profile moments where Lashkar's fingerprints are suspected or spotted:

--International authorities are looking into whether an Islamic school run by Lashkar trained at least one of the bombers who attacked four London buses on July 7. Officials are also looking closely at the associations of the three other bombers. Pakistani authorities have yet to find direct links and say any tie may be a small piece of the investigation.

--In Virginia, a prominent Islamic scholar was sentenced to life in prison this summer for encouraging his followers to join the Taliban and fight the United States after Sept. 11, 2001. After one fiery speech, several attendees went to Pakistan and received military training from Lashkar. The young men were part of the ''Virginia jihad network'' that sometimes trained for holy war by playing paintball games in the woods.

--U.S. officials say Abu Farraj al-Libbi, a top al-Qaida operational leader picked up in Pakistan in May, ran from a site associated with Lashkar before Pakistani forces captured him in a graveyard shootout. He is in U.S. custody, accused of planning two assassination attempts on Musharraf. Some Pakistani officials have said al-Libbi was sheltered by another Muslim militant organization.

--In March 2002, a senior al-Qaida lieutenant and planner, Abu Zubaydah, was captured at a Lashkar safehouse in Faisalabad, Pakistan.

-- The Australian Taliban, David Hicks, whom U.S. forces captured fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan, was trained by Lashkar in the late 1990s. He is being held in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

The Bush administration is cautious about pushing too hard on Pakistan, an ally in the fight against terrorism.

The United States added Lashkar to its list of terrorist groups in 2001 and extended the designation in December 2003.

''We hope this list will help to isolate these terrorist organizations ... and to prevent their members' movement across international borders,'' State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said then.

U.S. officials acknowledge the differences between al-Qaida and Lashkar, including their respective roots in the Wahhabi and Deobandi sects of Islam. Yet they say that their histories have intersected since the 1990s, creating highly complex and dangerous relationships that authorities sometimes struggle to monitor.

The officials and counterterrorism experts note that camps affiliated with Lashkar may be particularly attractive to extremist recruits because they don't get the scrutiny of those run by al-Qaida, now largely underground.

''What's crazy is that these groups, because they are a little bit more low key than al-Qaida, they have been able to operate, in Pakistan especially without hindrance,'' said Evan Kohlmann, an international terrorism consultant who has studied Lashkar.

------

Associated Press writers Foster Klug in Washington and Matthew Pennington in Islamabad contributed to this report.